United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________

No. 96-3120 _____________

Oleta Prinsloo, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Appeal from the United States Arkansas State University, State of * District Court for the Arkansas; Roger Lambert, Chair, * Eastern District of Arkansas. Department of History in His * Individual and Official Capacity; * [UNPUBLISHED] James Greenwald, Professor, in His * Individual and Official Capacity, * * Appellants. * _____________

Submitted: February 13, 1997 Filed: May 9, 1997 _____________

Before BOWMAN and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges, and KOPF,1 District Judge. _____________

PER CURIAM.

The issue in this case is whether Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, see 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1688, abrogates the Eleventh Amendment immunity of the

1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska, sitting by designation. defendants. The District Court2 held that it does, and the defendants appeal from that ruling.

Crawford v. Williams, 109 F.3d 1281 (8th Cir. 1997), controls the present case. In Crawford, the Court decided the same issue we are asked to decide in this case. The Court squarely held that under Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 116 S. Ct. 1114 (1996), the Eleventh Amendment does not deprive the federal courts of jurisdiction to hear Title IX claims. See Crawford, 109 F.3d at 1282-83. In reaching its decision, the Court specifically rejected the contention, which the defendants make in this case, that Congress enacted Title IX pursuant to the Spending Clause, and therefore that section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment does not give Congress the ability to abrogate the states' immunity to Title IX claims. Id. at 1283.

Because we are bound by the holding in Crawford, the decision of the District Court must be, and is, affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

2 The Honorable George Howard, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-